In Washington, a federal judge mandated the Trump administration to expedite payment on some portions of nearly $2 billion due to the partners of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department. The administration is required to meet this financial obligation by Monday as part of a lawsuit addressing the sudden termination of foreign assistance funding.
U.S. District Judge Amir Ali characterized this partial payment as a “concrete” initial measure and criticized the administration, which is entangled in numerous lawsuits aiming to reverse its dismantling of USAID and the suspension of its funding for six weeks. This freeze has resulted in the cessation of U.S.-sponsored aid and development projects around the globe and caused job losses.
During a four-hour hearing, Ali showed skepticism regarding the Trump administration’s stance that a president holds significant authority to override congressional spending decisions related to foreign policy. Ali highlighted the gravity of considering appropriations as optional. He questioned government lawyer Indraneel Sur about the constitutional basis for such a stance.
This order is part of an ongoing case, with future rulings expected concerning the administration’s decision to cut more than 90% of USAID contracts worldwide this month. Ali’s decision follows the Supreme Court’s recent division over the administration’s request to freeze USAID funding, instructing clarity from Ali on his previous mandate for swiftly releasing funds for completed projects.
The funding suspension originated from an executive order by President Donald Trump on January 20. Following Ali’s temporary restraining order, the administration appealed and asserts a transition from a comprehensive freeze to individualized assessments, which led to the cancellation of 5,800 USAID contracts—representing over 90% of the agency’s project contracts—and 4,100 State Department grants totaling nearly $60 billion.
During Thursday’s proceedings, government lawyer Sur maintained that the funding freeze had ended. However, with numerous standardized contract terminations issued within days earlier this month, there are allegations from nonprofits and businesses about the impracticality of conducting individual contract reviews, asserting that these cancellations essentially cemented previous program shutdowns.
The AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, the Global Health Council, and additional plaintiffs seek reimbursement for their share of nearly $2 billion owed by USAID prior to the January 20 freeze. They also demand the reversal of all contract terminations and adherence to regulations for future termination procedures.
The Trump administration claimed to have resumed USAID debt payments post-freeze but cited staffing issues, with reduced workforce from forced leaves and dismissals, as a hurdle. Ali noted reports of USAID historically processing numerous payments prior to the shutdown and observed that 100 staff members were recently reinstated to tackle payment processing. Ali suggested further staffing mobilization to meet the deadline.
